@phdthesis{Kass2019,
  author    = {Kaß, Christina},
  title     = {Unnecessary Alarms in Driving: The Impact of Discrepancies between Human and Machine Situation Awareness on Drivers' Perception and Behaviour},
  doi       = {10.25972/OPUS-19252},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-192520},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Forward Collision Alarms (FCA) intend to signal hazardous traffic situations and the need for an immediate corrective driver response. However, data of naturalistic driving studies revealed that approximately the half of all alarms activated by conventional FCA systems represented unnecessary alarms. In these situations, the alarm activation was correct according to the implemented algorithm, whereas the alarms led to no or only minimal driver responses. Psychological research can make an important contribution to understand drivers' needs when interacting with driver assistance systems. The overarching objective of this thesis was to gain a systematic understanding of psychological factors and processes that influence drivers' perceived need for assistance in potential collision situations. To elucidate under which conditions drivers perceive alarms as unnecessary, a theoretical framework of drivers' subjective alarm evaluation was developed. A further goal was to investigate the impact of unnecessary alarms on drivers' responses and acceptance. Four driving simulator studies were carried out to examine the outlined research questions. In line with the hypotheses derived from the theoretical framework, the results suggest that drivers' perceived need for assistance is determined by their retrospective subjective hazard perception. While predictions of conventional FCA systems are exclusively based on physical measurements resulting in a time to collision, human drivers additionally consider their own manoeuvre intentions and those attributed to other road users to anticipate the further course of a potentially critical situation. When drivers anticipate a dissolving outcome of a potential conflict, they perceive the situation as less hazardous than the system. Based on this discrepancy, the system would activate an alarm, while drivers' perceived need for assistance is low. To sum up, the described factors and processes cause drivers to perceive certain alarms as unnecessary. Although drivers accept unnecessary alarms less than useful alarms, unnecessary alarms do not reduce their overall system acceptance. While unnecessary alarms cause moderate driver responses in the short term, the intensity of responses decrease with multiple exposures to unnecessary alarms. However, overall, effects of unnecessary alarms on drivers' alarm responses and acceptance seem to be rather uncritical. This thesis provides insights into human factors that explain when FCAs are perceived as unnecessary. These factors might contribute to design FCA systems tailored to drivers' needs.},
  subject      = {Fahrerassistenzsystem},
  language  = {en}
}